Jessica Mathewson

During an appeal of an order to pay costs related to the clean-up of an environmental spill, an orderee requested presenter status.

The Tribunal granted the request, finding that the orderee's interests may be directly and substantially affected by the hearing, he has a genuine interest in the subject matter, and he is likely to make a relevant contribution to the Tribunal's understanding of the issues.

The Regional Municipality of Niagara issued an order under s. 100.1(1) of the Environmental Protection Act against several persons to recover costs incurred for cleaning up a spill.

Several named persons appealed the order.

The Region subsequently advised the Tribunal that it intended to revoke the order against four of the appellants, as they did not have ownership or control of the pollutants.

The Tribunal found the proposed revocation to be consistent with the purpose of the Act and in the public interest, revoked the order against those four appellants, and dismissed their appeals.

The Director of the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change issued an order regarding a spill of environmental contaminants at a site in Fort Erie.

Several parties appealed the order.

After the required remediation work was completed by some of the appellants, the Director proposed to revoke the order.

The Environmental Review Tribunal found the proposed revocation to be consistent with the purpose of the Environmental Protection Act and in the public interest.

The Tribunal revoked the order and dismissed the appeals.

The Regional Municipality of Niagara issued an order under s. 100.1 of the Environmental Protection Act to recover clean-up costs related to a spill.

Several named persons appealed the order and filed a Notice of Allegation against other parties, including the Town of Fort Erie.

The Town of Fort Erie requested party status in the proceeding.

The Tribunal granted the Town party status, finding its interests may be directly and substantially affected by the outcome of the appeal.

The Tribunal also set a schedule for motions and the main hearing.

At a preliminary hearing regarding an appeal of a Director's Order related to an environmental spill, several individuals and entities sought party and participant status.

The Tribunal granted party status to several potential orderees and individuals named in the order, finding their interests could be directly and substantially affected.

The Regional Municipality of Niagara was granted participant status due to its genuine interest as an adjacent property owner.

The preliminary hearing was adjourned to allow ongoing remediation work to proceed.

The appellants appealed a Director's Order relating to a spill of environmental contaminants, including toluene and acetone, at a site in Fort Erie.

Several appellants brought motions to stay the Director's Order pending the final resolution of the appeals.

At the hearing, the moving parties and the Director presented an agreement for a partial stay and interim amendments to the Order.

The Environmental Review Tribunal approved the consent agreement, finding that the stay would not result in a danger to health, safety, or the environment, and that the balance of convenience favoured granting the stay to allow necessary investigative work to proceed.

Several proposed intervenors brought motions to vary a motions judge's decision denying them intervenor status in a judicial review application.

They argued the motions judge erred by considering the overlap in their proposed submissions and the burden on the court process.

The Divisional Court dismissed the motions, finding the motions judge applied the correct legal principles and made no error in principle or palpable and overriding error of fact in exercising his discretion.

The appellant appealed an order granting the respondent employment agency's motion for summary judgment and dismissing her claim.

The motion judge found no evidence that the agency was contractually obliged to forward her application for a specific position.

The Court of Appeal found no error in the motion judge's conclusion that the claim was based on bare allegations.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay costs of $4,500.

The applicants, who identify as atheists, alleged that the respondent school board discriminated against them on the basis of creed by permitting only the Gideons to distribute religious literature (the New Testament) to grade five students.

The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario held that atheism falls within the definition of 'creed' under the Human Rights Code.

The Tribunal found that the board's original policy, which allowed only one religious group to distribute texts, was discriminatory.

Furthermore, the Tribunal concluded that the board's revised policy, which ostensibly allowed other groups to distribute materials but was applied inconsistently and restrictively, also failed to comply with the Code.

The Tribunal ordered the board to cease distributing religious publications unless it developed a new, non-discriminatory policy.